State v. Hennings, 871 N.W.2d 473

On Sept. 13, 2014, Deputy Thom investigated dirt-bike activity at Pipestem Dam and found Daryl Hennings and another man standing by two dirt-bikes; Thom smelled alcohol.
A third rider, Gary Ronholm, arrived; one companion fled on foot while officers detained Hennings and Ronholm.
Trooper Sova administered field sobriety tests: Hennings failed four tests and was arrested about 46 minutes after initial contact.
At 9:28 p.m., an Intoxilyzer breath test produced a .168 BAC for Hennings.
Evidence included testimony that Hennings rode dirt-bikes earlier that day, that alcohol was present and consumed at the site, and Hennings’ own testimony that a bike later became inoperable and he pushed it while drinking.
The district court convicted Hennings of DUI under N.D.C.C. § 39-08-01(1)(a)-(b); Hennings appealed sufficiency of evidence and other issues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency to prove driving while under the influence	Hennings: State failed to prove he drove a vehicle while impaired	State: Evidence shows Hennings operated the dirt-bike while intoxicated (ride earlier, smelled of alcohol, failed sobriety/breath tests)	Affirmed — a rational factfinder could conclude Hennings violated § 39-08-01(1)(a)-(b)
Reliance on Larson precedent	Hennings: District court improperly relied on State v. Larson to convict for controlling/pushing an inoperable vehicle	State: Larson supports conviction where defendant can direct movement (steering/brakes) even if not motor-running	Court did not need to resolve Larson issue; other evidence of driving supported conviction
Actual Physical Control (APC) theory	Hennings: Alternatively argues conviction insufficient for APC while intoxicated	State: Court focused on DUI charge, not APC	Not addressed — defendant was charged/convicted of DUI, APC not charged so court declined to address it
Clerical error in judgment	Hennings: N/A (raised by court)	N/A	Remanded to correct judgment language to show he was found guilty (not that he pled guilty)

State v. Larson, 479 N.W.2d 472 (N.D. 1992) (defendant steering an inoperable bus was found to be "driving")
State v. Jacobson, 338 N.W.2d 648 (N.D. 1983) (distinguishing APC from DUI)
State v. Bitz, 757 N.W.2d 565 (N.D. 2008) (standard for sufficiency review: view evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
State v. Olson, 552 N.W.2d 362 (N.D. 1996) (discussing appellate review of sufficiency)
State v. Berger, 235 N.W.2d 254 (N.D. 1975) (court not required to make findings in criminal cases)